JollyGreenGiant wrote:For those of you who can see "median" graded essays -- can you confirm that those essays are dogshit? I feel like a friggin' idiot trying to do these essays and looking at the analysis.

also interested in this. I understand that BarBri provides a "grading sheet" for the essays in the back of the MEE book, but as with all things Barbri, I simply don't trust it.

I turned in a question on Maryland corporations and they gave me a "2" on the grading (out of 6), claiming that I didn't discuss equity or fraud for piercing the corporate veil.

I double-checked, and I absolutely stated fraud and equity as the factors for consideration for PCV, and then applied facts (or stated why the facts didn't apply) to each factor.

So I was just perusing my state's bar information and read that internet connection will not be provided at the test center for those who use exam soft.

How the hell is this supposed to work then? I used examsoft in law school and was under the impression that the auto save feature needs internet connectivity in order to work. The information says that we are responsible for uploading the files after the test somewhere that has internet access. But my question is, will the examsoft auto save feature still work if there's no internet connectivity? If not, I may just go ahead and write my answer. I've spent too much damn time studying for this bullshit to fail because my comp. crashed and lose all the stuff I've typed. (I may still fail, but it won't be because of a computer issue)

Things Barbri thinks you should know for the bar exam in one essay response: Full Faith and Credit for Child Support Orders Act, Uniform Interstate Family Support Act, and Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act.

i'm just now looking at the NY bar essays from prior years available on the NYBOLE site. barbri essays are, without any exaggeration, 100% pure flame. most of the real essays i have looked at are so straightforward they are simplistic.

one of the questions was property, and there were 2 sentences before the particular call. there was a land contract and the property was destroyed by a flood. Q: can the buyer rescind the contract? jfc could it get any easier?

5ky wrote:i'm just now looking at the NY bar essays from prior years available on the NYBOLE site. barbri essays are, without any exaggeration, 100% pure flame. most of the real essays i have looked at are so straightforward they are simplistic.

one of the questions was property, and there were 2 sentences before the particular call. there was a land contract and the property was destroyed by a flood. Q: can the buyer rescind the contract? jfc could it get any easier?

Arent the barbri questions with the "R" in front of it released questions though?

5ky wrote:i'm just now looking at the NY bar essays from prior years available on the NYBOLE site. barbri essays are, without any exaggeration, 100% pure flame. most of the real essays i have looked at are so straightforward they are simplistic.

one of the questions was property, and there were 2 sentences before the particular call. there was a land contract and the property was destroyed by a flood. Q: can the buyer rescind the contract? jfc could it get any easier?

Arent the barbri questions with the "R" in front of it released questions though?

yeah but those are fairly old i think. and i feel like they are like the hardest ones. i dunno, you can compare for yourself. they have felt a lot easier to me. the calls in particular seem way more focused, instead of "what are S's rights and liabilities for the fact pattern" that barbri often gives

5ky wrote:i'm just now looking at the NY bar essays from prior years available on the NYBOLE site. barbri essays are, without any exaggeration, 100% pure flame. most of the real essays i have looked at are so straightforward they are simplistic.

one of the questions was property, and there were 2 sentences before the particular call. there was a land contract and the property was destroyed by a flood. Q: can the buyer rescind the contract? jfc could it get any easier?

Arent the barbri questions with the "R" in front of it released questions though?

yeah but those are fairly old i think. and i feel like they are like the hardest ones. i dunno, you can compare for yourself. they have felt a lot easier to me. the calls in particular seem way more focused, instead of "what are S's rights and liabilities for the fact pattern" that barbri often gives

5ky wrote:i'm just now looking at the NY bar essays from prior years available on the NYBOLE site. barbri essays are, without any exaggeration, 100% pure flame. most of the real essays i have looked at are so straightforward they are simplistic.

one of the questions was property, and there were 2 sentences before the particular call. there was a land contract and the property was destroyed by a flood. Q: can the buyer rescind the contract? jfc could it get any easier?

Arent the barbri questions with the "R" in front of it released questions though?

yeah but those are fairly old i think. and i feel like they are like the hardest ones. i dunno, you can compare for yourself. they have felt a lot easier to me. the calls in particular seem way more focused, instead of "what are S's rights and liabilities for the fact pattern" that barbri often gives

I like when they give you the required elements for crimes in New York

5ky wrote:i'm just now looking at the NY bar essays from prior years available on the NYBOLE site. barbri essays are, without any exaggeration, 100% pure flame. most of the real essays i have looked at are so straightforward they are simplistic.

one of the questions was property, and there were 2 sentences before the particular call. there was a land contract and the property was destroyed by a flood. Q: can the buyer rescind the contract? jfc could it get any easier?

Arent the barbri questions with the "R" in front of it released questions though?

yeah but those are fairly old i think. and i feel like they are like the hardest ones. i dunno, you can compare for yourself. they have felt a lot easier to me. the calls in particular seem way more focused, instead of "what are S's rights and liabilities for the fact pattern" that barbri often gives

I'm doing UBE rather than NY so perhaps that explains the difference, but in my MEE Barbri book the month and year are stamped beside each essay, presumably to indicate when the essay was actually tested.

clashjones87 wrote:Those of you taking the NCBE online tests: are you taking each 100-question set during one sitting? Also, are you multiplying your raw by 1.9 or 2?

Thanks.

I took it in one sitting. They give you the scaled. You don't need to do your own *1.9 raw to scaled conversion. In fact, you have to manually go through each answer on their sheet to even figure out what your raw is.

rnf1292 wrote:Can an oral restrictive covenant on land ever be enforceable? i.e. you sell someone a piece of land on the condition that they only use it for residential purposes but this is not stated anywhere in the deed?

Off the top of my head, no. A restrictive covenant must be conveyed with title (writing).

On top of that, if the grantee attempts to alienate subject to the grantor's restrictive covenant, that title is inherently not marketable since no reasonable third party would purchase the parcel with such a covenant.

A restrictive covenant won't be, but its very possible an implied equitable servitude could be implied in those circumstances as long as there is a common scheme filed. The oral communication telling him that would put him on notice also.

Can someone clarify something for me that I really should know by now?

In Torts, can you establish negligence per se showing breach of traffic laws (e.g., crossing double yellow)? I have written in my notes that it has to be a criminal statute (i.e., not traffic violations), but I seem to remember several practice questions suggesting crossing a double yellow line or other traffic violations might be negligence per se.

Is it a NY Distinction that a hold over tenant creates a month-to-moth tenancy, regardless of whether it is residential or commercial? This seems to be what R-39 says and now that I look at it what the CMR says, but for some reason I never internalized this so I just want to make sure this is right

imchuckbass58 wrote:Can someone clarify something for me that I really should know by now?

In Torts, can you establish negligence per se showing breach of traffic laws (e.g., crossing double yellow)? I have written in my notes that it has to be a criminal statute (i.e., not traffic violations), but I seem to remember several practice questions suggesting crossing a double yellow line or other traffic violations might be negligence per se.

Thanks.

Its supposed to be a statute or ordinance that provides for criminal penalties. They aren't going to give you a statute where you have to guess whether or not it has such penalties. If it didn't have criminal penalties, they would have to tell you.

imchuckbass58 wrote:Can someone clarify something for me that I really should know by now?

In Torts, can you establish negligence per se showing breach of traffic laws (e.g., crossing double yellow)? I have written in my notes that it has to be a criminal statute (i.e., not traffic violations), but I seem to remember several practice questions suggesting crossing a double yellow line or other traffic violations might be negligence per se.

Thanks.

Its supposed to be a statute or ordinance that provides for criminal penalties. They aren't going to give you a statute where you have to guess whether or not it has such penalties. If it didn't have criminal penalties, they would have to tell you.

This is true, but the motor vehicle code nearly always counts so the double yellow example is doable. If its in the traffic code and you can be fined, it counts so long as the other requirements are met. E.g. not a headlight violation during daytime, not an expired license plate, etc.

kaiser wrote:Its supposed to be a statute or ordinance that provides for criminal penalties. They aren't going to give you a statute where you have to guess whether or not it has such penalties. If it didn't have criminal penalties, they would have to tell you.

This is true, but the motor vehicle code nearly always counts so the double yellow example is doable. If its in the traffic code and you can be fined, it counts so long as the other requirements are met. E.g. not a headlight violation during daytime, not an expired license plate, etc.

blong4133 wrote:So I was just perusing my state's bar information and read that internet connection will not be provided at the test center for those who use exam soft.

How the hell is this supposed to work then? I used examsoft in law school and was under the impression that the auto save feature needs internet connectivity in order to work. The information says that we are responsible for uploading the files after the test somewhere that has internet access. But my question is, will the examsoft auto save feature still work if there's no internet connectivity? If not, I may just go ahead and write my answer. I've spent too much damn time studying for this bullshit to fail because my comp. crashed and lose all the stuff I've typed. (I may still fail, but it won't be because of a computer issue)

If the bar exam were a man I'd punch it square in the mouth.

You don't need an Internet Connection DURING the Bar Exam for Autosave. Autosave works with or without Internet. If you go to the ExamSoft website, they say this in the frequently asked questions.

You will need an Internet Connection AFTER the Bar Exam. Each state is different as to when you need to upload. Some states require you to upload each day whereas other states require you to upload at the end of the exam.

Shit totally forgot I intended to get those NCBE tests and do them...anyone know if they are part of adaptibar?

Also last minute question about issue statements in essays: should we be using technical language like anti-lapse or adeem in the issue statement itself or should it be like 'the issue is whether A is entitled to the gift that her deceased mother would have received'? I thought it was the latter but I got an essay back claiming the former.

I just got back from being maid of honor in my friend's wedding and am freaking out. I wish I could just take it now. Also I never listened to federal jx or the end of evidence and crim.

somewhatwayward wrote:Shit totally forgot I intended to get those NCBE tests and do them...anyone know if they are part of adaptibar?

Also last minute question about issue statements in essays: should we be using technical language like anti-lapse or adeem in the issue statement itself or should it be like 'the issue is whether A is entitled to the gift that her deceased mother would have received'? I thought it was the latter but I got an essay back claiming the former.

I just got back from being maid of honor in my friend's wedding and am freaking out. I wish I could just take it now. Also I never listened to federal jx or the end of evidence and crim.

I typically use the technical term in the issue statement, so long as it is still coherent. I might say "The issue is whether a specific gift is subject to ademption when sold by the testator prior to his death". Without the main terms, it doesn't really show in your issue statement that you honed in on precisely what the legal concept being tested actually is. Might as well make it clear from the onset that you know exactly what they are getting at.

As for fed. juris, just make sure you understand diversity jurisdiction, and I'd at least take a look at removal jurisdiction in the CMR. Those are the only concepts ever really mentioned in essays.

As for the end of evidence & crim, I guess that would mean some of the last few hearsay exceptions and the end of crim pro (which was just some misc. courtroom procedure). The former I'd check in the CMR since you want to be a master of those exceptions. The latter is much more minor.

Uh, I saw this in one of the "acceptable" NY essay answers for one of the released exams. Did this guy totally make this up, or is this inquiry into "levels of encounters" something that we should know? I just analyzed the question based on a Terry/reasonable suspicion standard.

New York categorizes street encounters between police officers and citizens intofour levels, based upon the level of suspicion an officer has grounds for. In a level 1encounter, the officer has no suspicion that criminal activity is afoot, and can onlyinquire of persons their name and residence; they cannot compel the person to remain,and the person is free to leave. In a level 2 encounter, the officer can ask pointedquestions pertaining to a specific instance of criminal activity that might lead areasonable person to believe they are suspected of a crime, based upon some foundedsuspicion that criminal activity is afoot. In a level 3 encounter, the officer can brieflydetain a suspect and question them, as well as quickly frisk them for weapons to ensurethe safety of the officer during the encounter, based upon the officer's reasonablesuspicion that the defendant is engaged in criminal activity. Finally, a level 4 encounterculminates in an arrest, where the officer has probable cause to suspect that the defendantcommitted the crime in question.

Last edited by PitchO20 on Sun Jul 28, 2013 11:56 am, edited 1 time in total.